Reconsider decision on a blanket ban on car films.
1. Existing guidelines (70% front and rear VLT, 50% side glass VLT) need to be enforced rather than relegated to history books.
2. Small and medium sized cars do NOT come pre-installed with either anti-glare, heat rejecting or safe glasses.
3. The compromise is that safety films are installed on glasses that are thin and break easily, cost Rs. 4000 and up. Protects occupants from attacks and danger from shattered glass during a collision, as also valuables left inside the car when parked.
4. Heat rejection films: Rs. 800 and up are installed by small vehicle owners in order to aid air-conditioning, especially during the months of May and June when the heat is unbearable especially in Delhi, where the order comes into effect first.
5. Contrary to the claim that films of the order of even 70% Visual Light Transmission aid criminals, women have gone to accessory stores to install films in their cars to escape harassment by men on bikes, unabashed stares and lewd comments by men (in other cars or on the road otherwise), especially in Delhi.
6. The indiscriminate and blanket ban on films ridicules the safety of ordinary, law abiding women and men, instead of enforcing already strict measures in place under the Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989. via the use of Electronic tint-meters (used to enforce the Rule of Law, succesfully, by the Chandigarh Police for many years now).
Today: Tarun is counting on you
Tarun Singh needs your help with “the supreme court of india: Reconsider decision on a blanket ban on car films.”. Join Tarun and 3,930 supporters today.